[watsisname]

I'm fairly certain it's a fact of human psychology, not American psychology.

Ok then, which societies have actively educated their people on a broad scale (such as using the schools or whatever) to think in a logical and skeptical manner?

I don't mean to butt into that argument, but I don't think anyone can easily qualitatively compare such things on that wide of a scale.  And I believe it is fair to say that all societies have members that don't think or behave rationally.  All human beings are capable of acting irrationally given the right wrong circumstances.

[General Battuta]

Quite so.

These appear to be more biological facts of human cognition than social factors.

[karajorma]

Ok then, which societies have actively educated their people on a broad scale (such as using the schools or whatever) to think in a logical and skeptical manner?

Shouldn't you be answering that question? Battuta seems to have been saying that not doing that isn't something special to America.

[General Battuta]

Yeah, I'm not really sure exactly what he's after.

[Kosh]

The way I interpreted that statement was that illogic is a natural part of humanity and so we can never have a society based on logic. My point was we dont have one because no one has seriously tried.

[Rodo]

The way I interpreted that statement was that illogic is a natural part of humanity and so we can never have a society based on logic. My point was we dont have one because no one has seriously tried.

It's not about trying or not.. you can't force logic into someone and that's for sure, thus making a fully logic society an impossible dream for these days.

[NGTM-1R]

The goal in a debate is to convince the other one that your opinion is the correct one.

Beg differ. The objective is never to convince the person opposite you. Bias renders this goal unuseful. You should strive to be able to convince an unbiased observer of the debate, not your opponent.

[Kosh]

The way I interpreted that statement was that illogic is a natural part of humanity and so we can never have a society based on logic. My point was we dont have one because no one has seriously tried.

It's not about trying or not.. you can't force logic into someone and that's for sure, thus making a fully logic society an impossible dream for these days.

Why not? Education systems have been successfully indoctrinating people for more than a hundred years.

[General Battuta]

Because the heuristic biases at work may be hard-coded into human cognition.

[Lucika]

The goal in a debate is to convince the other one that your opinion is the correct one.

Beg differ. The objective is never to convince the person opposite you. Bias renders this goal unuseful. You should strive to be able to convince an unbiased observer of the debate, not your opponent.

You are right if we are considering the formal debates, like the ones at the elections. But if a scientist and a priest sits down and start arguing about God's existence, they're only trying to convince each other. And that's where the fun begins...

[Kosh]

Because the heuristic biases at work may be hard-coded into human cognition.

Well, I don't see how it can possibly be any worse than what we have now. If someone is trained from a young age to follow the rules of logic and skepticism, most of the time that person's decisions will be heavily based on that. It's really about changing people's thinking patterns.

[General Battuta]

If someone is trained from a young age to follow the rules of logic and skepticism, most of the time that person's decisions will be heavily based on that.

While I'm not arguing that this approach would be better, we have no evidence that the above statement is true.

[Kosh]

Do we have any evidence that it is not true? I can't think of any society that actively teaches those concepts to children. We can still infer it based on the way different cultures influence ways of thinking.

[Lucika]

I can't think of any society that actively teaches those concepts to children.

I can. The ancient Greeks used this method for teaching mathematics.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

I used to write argumentative essays very well back when I was in Secondary 4 / Grade 10. The argumentative essay is, in my opinion, what secured me the award for Best in English in my entire cohort when I graduated, because that was exactly what I did during the GCE "O" Levels in 2007.

I was such a stickler for English back then, to the point where I pissed mura off on IRC, a full year later.

[Rodo]

For a system to have a moderate success on the hole society's "education" it must be inclusive on all levels, that's just not possible now simply because we are all different, you can teach all you want from as young as you'll be pleased, but in the end the one taking the choices will be the individual, and that's all that maters.
Remember that you can always choose to not like what you are being told, or not to trust what you where taught, it's a choice, besides... teaching a logic way to think to all human kind would be a waste, where would the breakthrough theories come from then?

[General Battuta]

Do we have any evidence that it is not true? I can't think of any society that actively teaches those concepts to children. We can still infer it based on the way different cultures influence ways of thinking.

In the absence of evidence the null hypothesis holds: the variable has no effect.

[Kosh]

I can't think of any society that actively teaches those concepts to children.

I can. The ancient Greeks used this method for teaching mathematics.

Education was not widespread in those days, and certainly wasn't as long lasting as it is today.

In the absence of evidence the null hypothesis holds: the variable has no effect.

In the absence of evidence one way or another indicates a study needs to be done.

For a system to have a moderate success on the hole society's "education" it must be inclusive on all levels, that's just not possible now simply because we are all different, you can teach all you want from as young as you'll be pleased, but in the end the one taking the choices will be the individual, and that's all that maters.

Yes it does need to be done at all levels, but it certainly would have a lot of influence.

where would the breakthrough theories come from then?

Creativity is logical.

Remember that you can always choose to not like what you are being told, or not to trust what you where taught, it's a choice, besides... teaching a logic way to think to all human kind would be a waste,

No system of indoctrination is 100% of course, but how would it destroy creativity?

[Lucika]

I can't think of any society that actively teaches those concepts to children.

I can. The ancient Greeks used this method for teaching mathematics.

Education was not widespread in those days, and certainly wasn't as long lasting as it is today.

What can I say to that? You did not contradict my statement: the "elite", if you wish, had learning solely based on logic and logical explanations.

[Kosh]

I didn't contradict it because even though what you said was true, it doesn't necessarily apply because the percentage of the population trained in that manner was too small. I'm talking about taking it several steps further and applying it to the whole society, not just a select few.